Infrastructure Interaction Improving Regional Master Planning of Infrastructure by Taking Into Account Infrastructure Interaction
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Infrastructure Interaction Improving Regional Master Planning of Infrastructure by taking into account Infrastructure Interaction Master Thesis Wouter K. Meyers March 2008 FACULTY OF TECHNOLOGY, POLICY AND MANAGEMENT ENGINEERING AND POLICY ANALYSIS MSc DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY Infrastructure Interaction 2 Infrastructure Interaction Improving Regional Master Planning of Infrastructure by taking into account Infrastructure Interaction Wouter K. Meyers Student Number 1271342 Email Address [email protected] Graduation Committee Prof.dr.ir. M.P.C. Weijnen (Chair, Delft University of Technology) Dr.ir. G.P.J. Dijkema (1st Supervisor, Delft University of Technology) Dr.ir. W.M. de Jong (2 nd Supervisor, Delft University of Technology) Prof. K. Brown (External Supervisor, Queensland University of Technology) March 2008 FACULTY OF TECHNOLOGY, POLICY AND MANAGEMENT ENGINEERING AND POLICY ANALYSIS MSc DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY Infrastructure Interaction 3 Dedicated to my parents Infrastructure Interaction 4 Preface This thesis is the product of my graduation project at the Delft University of Technology in the master of Engineering & Policy Analysis and a visiting researcher at the Queensland University of Technology in Brisbane, Australia. The research has been funded by the CIBE project under the CRC for Construction Innovation. As a student and as a person I have always had a very broad interest, sometimes finding it difficult to make choices. In the thesis this part of my personality is reflected in the broad focus on infrastructure. Of course writing a thesis without making choices is impossible; one would end up with an encyclopedia. The choices I have made for my thesis, from delineating the scope of the project, to specifying the important concepts from the thesis and the people to interview, have coincided with important choices on where I want to take my life in the future. I like to think that the interaction between these choices has created positive effects in both end products: the thesis and my life. I would like to take the opportunity here to thank the people that have contributed to my research in one way or another. First of all I would like to thank my main supervisors Gerard Dijkema in the Netherlands and Craig Furneaux in Australia for sharing with me their insights in how I could improve my research and for spurring me on when things seemed to stall. I would also like to thank my second supervisor in the Netherlands, Martin de Jong. His insight in how strategic planning is actually done was invaluable in the later stages of my research and has had a positive influence on the thesis. Also, many thanks to my professors Margot Weijnen in the Netherlands and Kerry Brown in Australia for their enthusiasm in getting me to the other side of the world and for their insights in making this a better work of science. Thanks to Gejan Meyers, Adriana Diaz Arias, Asti Mardiasmo and Anish Patil for proof reading the drafts of this thesis. Without their invaluable comments the final thesis would never have reached this level of quality. I would also like to thank CIBE, the TBM-Buitenlandfonds, the DUT CvB-Fonds and the DUT STIR-fonds for their financial help in making this project a reality. Gejan and Margriet, thank you for all the different kinds of support you gave me during this important phase of my studies. Thank you for keeping faith while August became September, September became December and December eventually turned into April. I would like to thank Laxman Samtani for introducing me to the nightlife of Brisbane, for being a really good friend and for sharing almost everything with me during my stay. Asti Mardiasmo introduced me to the ‘daylife’ of Brisbane, and its culinary highlights and deserves nothing but praise for that. To others it must have seemed like we couldn’t get along, but we know better! Rob Kivits was my Dutch mate in Australia. Thank you for all the good times we had, I hope your new life in Brisbane will be a grand success! To all the other people I met in Brisbane, too numerous to mention individually: thank you for making my stay worthwhile. I would like to thank Dimos, Benny and Arnoud, my three best friends, for being just that, and for challenging and motivating me every time to be a better person. To all my other Dutch friends and international friends: sorry for not showing my face that much for a couple of months, I’ll make it up to you, I promise! Finally, I need to thank Aris, my new roommate, for cooking for me for 2 months while I was finishing my thesis and for good discussions and stupid shows to distract me from working on this report. Delft, March 2008 Wouter Meyers Infrastructure Interaction 5 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 8 1 INTRODUCTION 9 2 PROBLEM EXPLORATION AND RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 11 2.1 INTRODUCTION 11 2.2 PROBLEM DESCRIPTION 11 2.3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE 12 2.4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 13 2.5 RELEVANCE OF THE RESEARCH 15 2.6 RESEARCH SCOPE AND EXPECTED RESEARCH RESULTS 15 2.7 CONCLUSION 15 3 A FRAMEWORK FOR THE ANALYSIS OF INTERACTION 16 3.1 INTRODUCTION 16 3.2 PROCESS REQUIREMENTS FOR REGIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE MASTER PLANNING 16 3.3 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS TO PLAN FOR INTERACTION BETWEEN INFRASTRUCTURES 27 3.4 CONCLUSION : A FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYSIS OF INTERACTIONS 30 4 INTRODUCTION TO THE CASE STUDIES 32 4.1 INTRODUCTION 32 4.2 CASE STUDY SET UP 32 4.3 SELECTION OF CASE STUDIES 32 4.4 DATA COLLECTION METHODS 34 4.5 ANALYSIS OF THE CASES 34 5 CASE STUDY 1: SOUTH EAST QUEENSLAND 36 5.1 INTRODUCTION 36 5.2 BACKGROUND : SEQ, SEQ REGIONAL PLAN AND SEQIPP 36 5.3 ANALYZING SEQ MASTER PLANNING WITH THE FRAMEWORK 37 5.4 THE DARRA TO SPRINGFIELD TRANSPORT CORRIDOR PROJECT 45 5.5 THE NORTH -SOUTH BYPASS TUNNEL PROJECT 52 5.6 IMPROVING THE FRAMEWORK 57 5.7 IMPROVING PLANNING FOR INTERACTION IN SEQ 58 5.8 CONCLUSION 62 Infrastructure Interaction 6 6 CASE STUDY 2: THE PERTH METROPOLITAN REGION 63 6.1 INTRODUCTION 63 6.2 BACKGROUND OF REGIONAL MASTER PLANNING IN PERTH 64 6.3 ANALYZING MASTER PLANNING IN PERTH USING THE FRAMEWORK 64 6.4 THE SOUTHERN SUBURBS RAILWAY LINE 69 6.5 THE ROCKINGHAM TRANSIT SYSTEM 79 6.6 IMPROVING THE FRAMEWORK 79 6.7 IMPROVING PLANNING FOR INTERACTION IN PERTH 81 6.8 CONCLUSION 82 7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 83 7.1 INTRODUCTION 83 7.2 MAIN CONCLUSIONS 83 7.3 MAIN LESSONS FROM THE CASE STUDIES 84 7.4 LESSONS FOR THE FRAMEWORK 85 7.5 IMPROVING PLANNING FOR INTERACTION IN SEQ 87 7.6 REFLECTION ON THE RESEARCH 89 7.7 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH 90 BIBLIOGRAPHY 91 APPENDIX A LIST OF INTERVIEWS 95 APPENDIX B LIST OF INTERACTIONS 96 GLOSSARY OF TERMS 98 Infrastructure Interaction 7 Executive Summary South East Queensland (SEQ) is the fastest growing region in Australia. To manage this growth the Queensland government has created the Office of Urban Management (OUM). The OUM delivered an infrastructure program of AUS$ 80 billion. In order to manage this it is important for the OUM to take into account the interactions that can emerge between infrastructures. Therefore the central question of the research presented in this report is: “ how can the Office of Urban Management improve the infrastructure master planning process in South East Queensland to better take into account the interactions between infrastructures? ” To answer this question first a framework was created for the analysis of infrastructure interaction in the Regional Master Planning of Infrastructure. The final framework is presented in Table 1, the initial framework can be found there by disregarding the bold items. This framework was used to analyze the planning process in South East Queensland and in the Perth Metropolitan Region. The analysis of the cases led to a few changes in the framework (bold in Table 1). The conclusion for SEQ is that the OUM needs to take an active role in engaging more stakeholders (including utilities and local government) in the planning process and involve itself more in the planning efforts of individual stakeholders to come to a truly integrated planning effort. Additional challenges for SEQ are the involvement of utilities and local government and various institutional problems. Recommendation for future research are gaining more fine grained insight in the framework and the way utilities can be involved in the master planning process. Table 1 Framework for the analysis of Infrastructure Interaction in the Regional Master Planning of Infrastructure. Bold items were added as a result of the case study results. Process Requirements Content Requirements • Involves the institutional, multi-actor Resource Effects of Interaction and physical dimensions of the gas, • Save or cost space electricity, drinking water, sanitation, • Save or cost money physical telecom and transport • Save or cost materials infrastructure for people and freight • Save or cost time over road, rail and water • Positive or negative social • A focus on planning of a region with the impact region as a holistic entity and taking into account both public and private Functionality Effects of Interaction • planning , while taking into account Increase or decrease safety • the local and national context Increase or decrease throughput • Sets the development objectives of a • Increase or decrease quality region and defines the long term • Increase or decrease waste program of projects to reach these goals Types of Interactions to take into • Planning is used as strategic account: programming • Dependence interaction • Plans are used as a communication • Environmental interaction method and as a way to control internal • Institutional interaction and external stakeholders • Multi-actor interaction • • Planners work to find strategy, analyze Spatial interaction • strategy and are catalysts for future Technological interaction • thinking Timing Interaction • Total Resource use in a • The planning process takes a network Region approach to decision making • There is a focus on interaction in the planning process.